The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSUPPLEMENTAL ITEM #4 DCCSP OPPOSITION ITEM #4 OPPOSITION LETTER DATED APRIL 23, X118 FROM PROPERTY AND BUSINESS OWNERS OF TUSTIN DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL CORE np n Property and Business Owners of Tustin Downtown Commercial Core [APR2 3 2018 USTIN ER!<'S OFFICE April 23, 2018 Planning Commission City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Re: Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan (DCCSP) Dear Commissioners Smith, Kozak, Thompson, Lumbard, and Mason: The undersigned each currently owns property and/or businesses in the Downtown and Old Town areas of Tustin covered by the contemplated DCCSP (the "Plan"). Collectively, we have hundreds of years of experience doing business in Tustin. We are honored to serve our customers who reside in Tustin and the surrounding communities. Our customers, friends, and neighbors in Tustin allow us to earn our livings here. At this time, we urge the Commission to withhold their votes on this Plan. We believe the Plan is insufficiently developed in a number of key areas. As it currently stands, the Plan arras neither the Commission nor the wider community it serves with enough data to make all informed decision. We cannot understate how profoundly we believe this Plan will affect Downtown Tustin and how we do business here. It is essential that all of us have the correct information and enough of it to assess the Plan's merits. We currently find the Plan deficient in addressing the following key issues: Public Safety The Plan calls for narrowing First Street and Main Street and converting Second Street and Third Street into one-way streets. These changes could have an impact on public safety by increasing response times to unacceptable levels or by making the streets difficult for emergency vehicles to navigate. The Plan should contain input from the Tustin Police Department and the Orange County Fire Authority on potential impacts to our community's public safety. Planning Commission, City Of Tustin April 23, 2018 Page 2 Parking The parking pian and parking study used in the Draft DCCSP is flawed. (Appendix pages I1-92 to I1-101.) It claims that there is "ample parking in Old Town," in contrast to the strained parking situation our customers, employees, and vendors encounter. The Plan identifies 1,741 off-street parking spaces and 404 on-street spaces. However, approximately 80% of the off-street parking is located on private property for the exclusive use of the private property owners and their customers, tenants, and employees. The Plan's attempt to count these private spaces towards public use is tenuous. The DCCSP envisions a Downtown where the businesses become more reliant on pedestrian and bicycle traffic only. The Plan envisions further business growth from the residents of the anticipated 887 dwelling units that may be built. However, the customers, employees, and vendors of our current businesses rely upon cars to reach us. The new residents of the 887 dwellings will not make up for business lost because this Plan makes it more difficult for our current customers to park and access our Downtown businesses. Traffic Circulation The Plan emphasizes making the Downtown area more pedestrian and bike friendly. A noble sentiment in theory, but it neglects the reality that most of us, our customers, and our vendors currently use vehicles. Tustin is not an island. This Plan cannot be blissfully ignorant of the fact that our customers drive to get here from other non-Downtown areas of Tustin as well as communities outside of Tustin. Furthermore, our suppliers and their delivery vehicles must continue to easily access our businesses. We cannot serve our customers without our vendors and their goods. Financial Impact The Plan is void of any analysis regarding its potential fiscal impact - both with regards to us owners and operators, as well as you, the City, and your coffers. Similar plans proposed in other Southern California communities include a "Fiscal Impact Analysis" upon which stakeholders and city officials can base their decisions. We do not believe it is prudent for the City to move forward with its vote on the Plan absent an honest discussion about how much Planning Commission, City Of Tustin April 23, 2018 Page 3 the Plan will cost to implement, who bears the burden of those costs, and what the quantifiable economic benefits to the community may be. The section in the Plan Appendix titled "Economic Analysis" hardly addresses fiscal impact. (Appendix pages I1-111 to I1-123.) It contained demographics and housing data from the Census Bureau that was simply "cut and pasted" into a presentation, but zero analysis. Review of Past Projects 1 Case Studies The City should present summaries of past projects they have undertaken including an honest assessment about what aspects of those projects succeeded and what aspects failed. An honest assessment will include feedback from all stakeholders including residents, customers, merchants and city officials alike. We suggest looking into the diagonal parking added to EI Camino Real many years ago, the development of Prospect Village, and the development of The District Shopping center. Furthermore, it would be valuable to see what other communities in Orange County and Southern California have undertaken Specific Plans for downtown areas. A presentation of those plans' successes and failures would aid in assessing the merits of this proposed Plan. Comment Period and Community Feedback The Community Development department held several workshops during the preparation of this Plan. However, we draw a distinction between the development of the Plan and its release in its current form. Allowing only ten days for the stakeholders of this community (as well as the Planning Commission) to digest over 1,600 pages of material is simply insufficient. Furthermore, the Community Development Department should reach out to all business and property owners in the affected areas through survey or ballot to collect their input, perhaps with the assistance of the Chamber of Commerce. The ten-day comment period coupled with the tiny signs the City posted announcing the Planning Commission meeting does not seem like a genuine effort to solicit input from affected stakeholders. Existing Businesses The Plan is very geared towards attracting new business. While "a rising tide raises all boats," new business does not have to come at the expense of existing businesses. We hope Planning Commission, City Of Tustin April 23, 2018 Page 4 the City will engage with us to help us move our businesses forward. None of us have enjoyed our commercial successes because of lack of ideas or grit. If the City cooperated with existing businesses more closely, incremental improvements to Downtown could happen more easily, even outside this Plan. The success or failure of this Plan hinges on the buy-in from all stakeholders of the Tustin community. Community is NOT just zoning maps and building codes — it is people. No amount of street improvements or setback adjustments can make a community. If staff at the City of Tustin is serious about this Pian, it must do a better job to sell the Plan to members of this community, including the Planning Commission and City Council. All of us need more information in order to make an informed decision on the merits of this Plan. We look forward to constructive dialogue with the City to address the issues and questions we presented here. In order for any Plan proposal to reflect the best possible alternatives, and in turn lead to the best possible outcomes, we are better served working together as mutually interested parties. We are not yet at that point, so we urge the Commission to withhold their votes on this Plan at this time. Sincerely, Paul Berkman Allen Bisbee Owner President/ General Manager Rutabegorz Saddleback Chapel 158 West Main Street 220 East Main Street Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Rick and Tammie Bullard Kimberly Conroy Owners Owner Invitation Design Studio American Grub/The Swinging Door Saloon 380 East First Street, Suite A 3551365 El Camino Real Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Phil and Linda Cox Joseph Leaman-Prescott Owners Owner Cox's Market Plaza Maureen Leaman 435 EI Camino Real 440 El Camino Real Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 (continued on next page) Planning Commission, City Of Tustin April 23, 2018 Page 5 Rick and Teri Mandel Mark and Gwen Masters Owners Owners Wellprint, Inc. Scooters Mailbox Cards and Gifts 380 East First Street 360 East First Street Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Eugene D. Micco Tiffany Miller President 1 CEO Owner Tustin Community Bank Mrs. B's Consignments, Etc. 13891 Newport Ave, Suite 100 115 West Main Street Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Thomas Penna Mary M. Prescott Owner Owner Salon Gallery and Suites Parque Santiago 220 EI Camino Real 215 South Prospect Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Earl J. Prescott Thomas B. Prescott Owner Owner 320 & 330 West First Street 270 East Main Street 225-255 EI Camino Real 225-255 EI Camino Real 250 South Prospect Avenue 250 South Prospect Avenue Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Alfio Rossetti Arnold and Tina Surfas Vice President Owners Roma D' Italia Surfas Ltd. Furriers 611 El Camino Real 145 West First Street Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 Colly Van Dyken Lyn Walker Owner CEO El Camino Pet Grooming Graphic Productions 301 EI Camino Real, 276 South Prospect Avenue, Suite AIB Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780